Christianity and the Scientist by Ian Barbour
Chapter 4: The Science Teacher and the Student
C. Relationships to Students and Faculty
"science can provide a secure basis for ethics by discovering and exhibiting reality to be an evolutionary process tending in a certain direction, action in conformity to which is to be taken as right conduct."
There are several difficulties in this idea which is common among biologists. Why should man follow the pattern of nature? Julian Huxley believes that man should co-operate because evolution evidences co- operation. But his grandfather, T. H. Huxley, believed man should co- operate for exactly the opposite reason: human ethics, he said, must be precisely the denial of the ethics of nature, which he saw as a ruthless struggle, "red in tooth and claw." A physicist suggests that ethics can be derived from the principle of entropy, since it is imperative for all men
"to fight always as vigorously as possible to increase the degree of order in their environment so as to combat the natural tendency for order in the universe to be transformed into disorder."15 Besides this
fundamental question of whether we are to look to nature for what we should do or for what we should not do, there are no criteria in this approach for any ethical discrimination between cases of mutual aid and of cruelty, both of which occur in nature. Nor does this theory provide any clear answer to the question: Now that further evolution in man is partially subject to his conscious control, toward what goals should he influence future human development? The attempt to derive ethics from evolution raises a number of issues which could legitimately be
mentioned in a biology course.
jolt to overcome apathy. Effective communication depends on the teacher’s vision, not alone of his subject and its relevance, but of the learner’s potentialities for appreciation and understanding. Concern for the individual also means respect for his integrity, and caution about
"classroom imperialism"; it is all too easy to try to mold students in one’s image and use them for one’s own ends.
A science teacher is a person and not just a scientist. As a man he
recognizes aesthetic and ethical values; he is an artist and a philosopher as well as an instructor in technical principles. As a Christian he should treat his subject no less rigorously for the fact that he looks on the created order with reverence and wonder, which will be communicated in-directly to his students. In advising students outside the classroom he must avoid imposing his ideas if he is to help the counselee think
through his own situation. Often the counseling relationship extends beyond academic matters, and the teacher exercises a sort of "pastoral"
function. His concern is not just for the technical ability of the student, but for all the levels of his life -- the pressures of conformity, his uncertainties and confusions, his emerging image of himself and his role. The faculty adviser can help a student find opportunities, both in choice of courses and elsewhere, to think through his own philosophy of life. The total influence of a teacher is the sum of many actions, from a discussion over a cup of coffee, to assumption of campus and
community responsibilities. The Jacob study16 found student attitudes and values influenced by two factors: a few outstanding professors whose personality affected their lives; and the prevailing climate of opinion or ethos of the campus. A teacher determines the atmosphere of the classroom, but he also influences the goals and norms of the
academic community.
The teacher is also a member of a larger faculty. Ideally a university or college is an integral enterprise, a community of common inquiry. More characteristic of most colleges, however, is specialization and
fragmentation. A university president described his institution as "a collection of departments connected by plumbing." Scientists and non- scientists are frequently in intellectual isolation from each other. There are many barriers to communication, such as lack of common
knowledge and interests, or differences in the logic of discourse and criteria of meaning in various fields. Some of the reluctance to enter into real dialogue stems from insecurity in relation to other faculty members.
We are hesitant to expose our ignorance outside our field; we retreat to territory in which we remain experts and can speak our own jargon.
Here the Christian faith offers insight concerning anxieties about status in the eyes of others; in the experience of a new relationship to God and man, a person can be freed from excessive self-defensiveness. The Christian sense of the oneness of truth and of mutual dependence can also make us more willing to learn from each other.
Specific interdisciplinary projects can assume many forms. Coming to know colleagues socially and in personal friendship often leads to interaction at the level of ideas, though this does not result
automatically. Participation in common problems relating to the intellectual life of the campus can encourage fruitful exchange.
Interdepartmental seminars, or courses representing bridges between disciplines, can aid the integration of specialized knowledge by faculty as well as students. Faculty research clubs on some campuses have facilitated encounter with the creative work of colleagues, and informal discussions have dealt with the methods of various fields and their assumptions. (What view of the nature of man is implicitly taught in our various departments? At what points do value-judgments enter each discipline?) In a faculty characterized by both pluralism of viewpoints and mutual tolerance and respect, such common explorations can be rewarding.
Every faculty member has a part in planning the curriculum. Most colleges require some work in science of all students. Should "general education" courses be provided, and should more than one field be included? Some of the advantages of a "block-and-bridge" course over an "elementary survey" have already been suggested. Other problems arise in planning requirements for science majors. How can a student include all the courses necessary for competence in his field, and yet avoid becoming a narrowly specialized technician? Most universities require science majors to take work in the humanities and social sciences; M.I.T., Cal. Tech., and other high-ranking technical schools have substantial requirements in these areas. Exposure to critical thought in regard to social and ethical issues is desirable because of the role such problems will assume in the scientist’s later activities, and also because technical schools tend to be so closely associated with industry that a student can easily acquire an uncritical version of "the American business creed" without ever having really thought about it.
Science majors, along with other students, should confront the perennial questions about the nature of man, God, and the goals of life, and some of the diverse answers which have been given. An academic institution
has a responsibility to help each student in the development of his philosophy of life. Our colleges, founded in the name of truth, have often become exponents of success; we turn out graduates without convictions, conformists whose actions are determined by what other people are doing. Nor can Western civilization be adequately understood without some knowledge of its Greek and Hebrew roots and the
religious tradition which has played so large a part in its history and thought. Some orientation in time is a mark of an educated man.
The U.S. reacted to Sputnik with action to improve science teaching in schools and universities. This reaction was justified, but it runs the danger that other fields will be neglected. The goal should be the education of every student up to his capacities -- not just the potential scientist. Some observers are apprehensive about the outcome if there is further in-crease in the trend for most of the best minds of our country to go into science. With the tremendous prestige of modern technology and with financial help coming from industry and government, there is
pressure even on liberal arts colleges to become technical schools.
Without lessening support for the natural sciences, the humanities and social sciences must also be strengthened. We have been suggesting that the teacher may derive from his religious faith both greater sensitivity to persons and active concern for the total educational process.
Footnotes:
1. See chapters by H. S. Taylor in H. N. Fairchild, ed., Religious Perspectives in College Teaching (Ronald Press, 1952); K. F.
Mather in P. M. Limbert, ed., College Teaching and Christian Values (Association Press, 1951).
2. J. B. Conant, On Understanding Science (Mentor Books, 1947).
3. H. Priestley, Introductory Physics (Allyn and Bacon, 1958).
4. W. C. Michels and A. L. Patterson, Elements of Modern Physics, pp. 1-2. Copyright 1951, D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc., Princeton, N.J., and used by permission.
5. G. Holton, introduction to Concepts and Theories in Physical Science (Addison Wesley, 1952).
6. J. B. Conant, ed., Harvard Case Histories in Experimental Science (Harvard Univ. Press, 1957).
7. H. K. Schilling, chap. 5 in A. L. Sebaly, ed., Teacher
Education and Religion (American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, 1959). This chapter includes an excellent bibliography.
8. See H. Margenau, The Nature of Physical Reality (McGrawHill, 1950).
9. W. C. Dampier, A History of Science (Cambridge Univ. Press, 4th ed., 1948), p. xxii. Used by permission.
10. E. A. Burtt, Metaphysical Foundations of Modern Science (Doubleday, 1954), p. 305.
11. I. G. Barbour, "Indeterminacy and Freedom: a Reappraisal,"
Philosophy of Science, January, 1955, p. 8.
12. E.g., E. McCrady in H. N. Fairchild, ed., op. cit.; C. E.
Raven, Natural Religion and Christian Theology (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1953); A. F. Smethurst, Modern Science and Christian Beliefs (Abingdon, 1955).
13. C. A. Coulson, Science and the Idea of God (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1958), p. 16.
14. C. H. Waddington, The Scientific Attitude (Penguin Books, 1948).
15. R. B. Lindsay, ‘Entropy Consumption and Values in Physical Science," American Scientist, September, 1959, p. 378. (Italics supplied)
16. P. E. Jacob, Changing Values in College (Harper, 1957).
16
return to religion-online
Christianity and the Scientist by Ian Barbour
Ian G. Barbour is Professor of Science, Technology, and Society at Carleton
College, Northefiled, Minnesota. He is the author of Myths, Models and Paradigms (a National Book Award), Issues in Science and Religion, and Science and
Secularity, all published by HarperSanFrancisco. Published by Associated Press, New York, 1960. This material was prepared for Religion Online by Ted and Winnie Brock.